KENNETH W. CORUM, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial judge's reasons for departing from the sentencing guidelines were not clear and convincing.
Appellant pleaded guilty to burglary and grand theft. The trial judge departed from the Guidelines sentence, citing vague reasons on the score-sheet.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Clear And Convincing Reasons cases and more on FLexlaw
NIMMONS, Judge.
Corum appeals sentences after guilty pleas on two counts of burglary of conveyances and two counts of grand theft. The trial judge departed from the Guidelines sentence of “any non-state prison sanction” and sentenced appellant to 18 months incarceration on three of the counts to run concurrently, and two years community control on the final count, to be served upon release from prison. The following notation was made by the judge on the score-sheet under the reasons for departure section: “Prior records, Probation before, Number of Crimes, this.”
The appellate courts of the State have been given the responsibility of determining whether the trial court has articulated clear and convincing reasons for departing from the Guidelines’ sentence. While brevity is oftentimes a virtue which should be encouraged, even in judicial proceedings, it should be apparent that we cannot reasonably be expected to properly perform our review function where the reasons given for departure are abbreviated in the extreme as in the instant case. Compare Alford v. State, 460 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Napoles v. State, 463 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Even were we to consider the transcript of the sentencing hearing as an aid in explaining what the judge meant, compare Hall v. State, 478 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1985), the transcript in the instant case is of no help in that respect.
The reasons given are neither clear nor convincing. Accordingly, the appellant’s sentences are vacated and the cause is remanded for resentencing. The trial court may reimpose sentences outside the Guide lines if the court states in writing clear and convincing reasons for doing so.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
SHIVERS and JOANOS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bauza v. State, 491 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…tencing issues raised, we nevertheless observe that the trial court neglected to justify its departure from sentencing guidelines in a written order; notations on a sentencing guidelines scoresheet do not suffice as a written order.1 Corum v. State, 484 So. 2d 102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). The state concedes error on this point. Furthermore, at least two of the reasons noted on the scoresheet, use of drugs and “misuse of Bible,” do not constitute clear and convincing reasons for departure. See Hendrix v. State, 47…
-
Speights v. State, 495 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…by the judge on the scoresheet do not suffice as a written order. Watson v. State, 492 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Bauza v. State, 491 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Bouthner v. State, 489 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). But cf. Corum v. State, 484 So. 2d 102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(ll) does not require a separate, written order but only that any sentence outside the guidelines be accompanied by a written statement delineating the reasons for departure. We find th…
-
Knight v. State, 501 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…sentences and the imposition of costs, and remand for resentencing consistent with this opinion. REVERSED and REMANDED. JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. . We note that in Bauza, supra, the Third District cited to our decision in Corum v. State, 484 So. 2d 102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) for the proposition that "notations on a sentencing guidelines scoresheet do not suffice as a written order.” Such is a misreading of Corum. We did not hold that an order separate and apart from the judge’s scoresheet notations w…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Alford v. State, 460 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Napoles v. State, 463 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Sami Behar v. Jefferson Nat'l Bank AT Sunny Isles, 478 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)